Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »
CBCS Comics
Not a CBCS member yet? Join now »

Good Morty Thead Redux- PLEASE Be Civil4650

Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
Anyone else think CBCS possibly waiting to see what CGC does?
Post 426 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
Probably. Should lead the industry and not follow it.
Post 427 • IP   flag post
Collector Scorpion private msg quote post Address this user
CBCS should take the lead on this, waiting on analysis.
Post 428 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR shrewbeer private msg quote post Address this user
#soon
Post 429 • IP   flag post
Collector Garnett21k private msg quote post Address this user

Post 430 • IP   flag post


Collector Scorpion private msg quote post Address this user
coming soon.

Post 431 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user

Post 432 • IP   flag post
Collector DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user
They could just say, "No." and leave it at that.
Post 433 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user

Post 434 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
Alledgedly, regarding the Madman edition, this is a foreign edition printing in-house with Madman under a license with Turner Broadcasting in 2014. I have no source or print run information to back up this information. This information was revealed to me by user Lucky Baru on the CGC forums.
Post 435 • IP   flag post
Collector Scorpion private msg quote post Address this user
Madman edition they should call these 2nd prints.
almost end of weekend, I bet nothing gets posted by Steve.
Post 436 • IP   flag post
Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
Yes, second printing.
Post 437 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
Tell that to Lucky Baru on the cgc forums lulz
Post 438 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
STEVE what happen did you dies?
Post 439 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user

Post 440 • IP   flag post
Collector Logan510 private msg quote post Address this user
But why would someone have gone to all the trouble to make fake copies before the book was hot? It makes no sense...

Post 441 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user

Post 442 • IP   flag post
Collector Garnett21k private msg quote post Address this user

Post 443 • IP   flag post
Collector DrWatson private msg quote post Address this user
I have a feeling this is going to end in tears.
Post 444 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrWatson
I have a feeling this is going to end in tears.



Post 445 • IP   flag post
CBCS Pressing SteveRicketts private msg quote post Address this user
My analysis of two “Good Morty” booklets that were sent to me by board member “Scorpion.”

I went into this with as open of a mind as I could have, as I’ve not been following the conversations about these booklets very closely. Just picking up things in very brief passing. I did go into this seeking the answers to a few basic questions;
1) Were both booklets produced from the same data source?
2) If not, was one produced “second generation” from the other?
3) Is one real and one counterfeit, or were they both produced by legitimate sources and included with real DVD/Bluray sets?
4) Would someone counterfeiting a DVD set actually go to the trouble of counterfeiting a throwaway pamphlet?
5) If one of these is not an actual counterfeit, would it be easy for a convincing counterfeit to be made?
6) Can CBCS certify and encapsulate these?


So let’s start at the beginning;
To explain the question, I’d have to explain print production a little. Printing an image onto a substrate is achieved by printing solid colors. In order to achieve a shade of a color, you have to print a series of tiny dots that fool your eye into thinking it is a lighter shade of color.

When you are printing something first generation, you have an image file that is sent to the printer. The computer screens the various shades of colors into dots. The printer can choose any number of different screens, based on individual lines per inch and dot shape.

1) Were both booklets produced from the same data source?
No. The explanation follows.

If someone is going to reproduce a printed piece, they could do so in a few different ways. They would have access to the original computer files, which obviously would be the easiest to faithfully recreate the original printing. They could also scan the originally produced piece to create new digital files. This would basically create a computer file that already has the dots used to produce the printed image. When the file is sent to the printer, it will rescreen the image. This is easily detectible by someone with years of printing experience. Rescreening leaves artifacts and many imperfections.

2) If not, was one produced “second generation” from the other?
Yes.

The two booklets are shown below. Booklet A was produced from raw image files using a 150dpi screen.
Booklet B was created by scanning booklet A, then rescreening it when it was printed with a 200dpi screen.













For a closer look at the differences, here is the print through a microscope.



















So after analyzing the two booklets and solving the first two riddles, I can now move on.

3) Is one real and one counterfeit, or were they both produced by legitimate sources and included with real DVD/Bluray sets?
This question is impossible to answer. I can tell you that booklet A was produced from the raw image files, and that booklet B was produced by scanning booklet A and rescreening the file when it was printed. Is one of them counterfeit? It’s absolutely possible that the company producing legitimate DVD/Blurays ran out of booklets, lost the original digital files, scanned the first booklet and created more. I worked in the printing industry for 25 years and I can say, as farfetched as that sounds, it is entirely possible. That said, booklet A is more likely genuine. Booklet B is a “second printing” at best, and counterfeit at worst, but there is no way to tell for certain.


4) Would someone counterfeiting a DVD set actually go to the trouble of counterfeiting a throwaway pamphlet?
In my honest opinion, no. They’d have no reason to reproduce the booklet. At the time these came out, the book was worthless and anyone buying the DVD/Blueray wouldn’t question the fact that it was a bootleg based on the fact that this worthless booklet was not included with their set. I suppose it’s possible, but in my opinion, not likely.


5) If one of these is not an actual counterfeit, would it be easy for a convincing counterfeit to be made?
Yes, and quite convincingly. Knowing what I know about them, and having my experience in the printing industry, I can say that these can be reproduced today, much closer to the original “Copy A” than the current “Copy B” was produced. Even without the original raw data file, it is possible to recreate this booklet with much more accuracy. While I’m not that “Copy B” is an actual counterfeit, if there is a lot of money to be made from an unsuspecting consumer, the odds of actual counterfeit copies being produced and injected into the market increases substantially.


6) Can CBCS certify and encapsulate these?
Due to the fact that these can be so easily, and convincingly counterfeited, no.


I huge thanks to Scorpion for sending me these booklets and letting me analyze them. I really appreciate it.
Post 446 • IP   flag post
Collector KatKomics private msg quote post Address this user
@SteveRicketts Thanks for the detail - while I'm not really concerned about this particular book it is super interesting to get a "peak behind the curtain" to see what and how printing techniques etc. are compared and contrasted!
Post 447 • IP   flag post
Collector Atakmunky7 private msg quote post Address this user
So will cbcs come to their senses and start calling the RaM comic book the 1st appearance of Rick and Morty again?
Post 448 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user

Post 449 • IP   flag post
Collector Atakmunky7 private msg quote post Address this user

Post 450 • IP   flag post
COLLECTOR kaptainmyke private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atakmunky7




Post 451 • IP   flag post
Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
@Atakmunky7

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atakmunky7
So will cbcs come to their senses and start calling the RaM comic book the 1st appearance of Rick and Morty again?


Just because CBCS can't grade it, does that mean it's no longer a first appearance?
Post 452 • IP   flag post
Collector CaptainCanuck private msg quote post Address this user
@SteveRicketts

Firstly, thank you Steve Ricketts. You've went above and beyond, your explanation was very thorough and explanatory.

Secondly,

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevericketts


4) Would someone counterfeiting a DVD set actually go to the trouble of counterfeiting a throwaway pamphlet?
In my honest opinion, no. They’d have no reason to reproduce the booklet. At the time these came out, the book was worthless and anyone buying the DVD/Blueray wouldn’t question the fact that it was a bootleg based on the fact that this worthless booklet was not included with their set. I suppose it’s possible, but in my opinion, not likely.

According to research by a couple of fellow board members here, it seems the contrary is true. Unless I'm mistaken, their research has showed that the two-staple version is only found along with counterfeit DVDs/Blurays.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stevericketts

6) Can CBCS certify and encapsulate these?
Due to the fact that these can be so easily, and convincingly counterfeited, no.

Lastly, before concluding that the book can be so easily and convincingly counterfeited, are we sure that we've even ever seen a genuine copy?
Post 453 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Good to see confirmation of what has been said by others. Hopefully, the allegations of "fake" will subside, at least until more information is known. Pronouncing something "fake", and repeatedly referring to it as "fake", without having all the answers is not fair to anyone.

Because the answer for CBCS is the same that others have been saying: we don't know.

The next step is this: to contact whoever is responsible for producing these and find out exactly what happened, when, why, and how.

They hold the key to this whole situation.

If that is NOT done, CBCS will have no reason to change their stance, and these tracts will end up having no value for anyone. I'm not suggesting that CBCS' stand will change; on the contrary, it is almost certain that it will not. But if there is ANY hope at ALL, then some real scholarship is going to have to be done, or these will be forever consigned to the Gobbledygook realm of collecting: you're never going to know if the copy you bought is the real deal or not.
Post 454 • IP   flag post
Collector DocBrown private msg quote post Address this user
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCanuck

According to research by a couple of fellow board members here, it seems the contrary is true. Unless I'm mistaken, their research has showed that the two-staple version is only found along with counterfeit DVDs/Blurays.


I'm not convinced that those "counterfeit" DVD/Blueray copies are actually counterfeit.

Couldn't an officially licensed producer make cheapo "looks like counterfeit" products...?

Given the coyness already displayed by "Madmen", I'd say it's a possibility.

A great deal of the "these are fake" arguments have hinged entirely on these things appearing in products that are "obviously counterfeit." The premise has been "counterfeit DVD, gotta be a counterfeit tract" (which, as I and others have argued, makes very little sense. While possible, it's certainly far outside the realm of probable.)

So what if those DVDs AREN'T counterfeit in the first place...?
Post 455 • IP   flag post
139145 571 30
Thread locked. No more posts permitted. Return home.
destitute